Never listen to female advice about women

This would be why. Dr. Helen linked to a woman who maintains a site called “How to Train Your Man”. Here’s her perspective on what women want:

You can’t blame guys for feeling exasperated. We expect them to be psychic and to know what we’re thinking. As in the Dodge commercial, many men think that if they “behave,” their woman will be happy. If they disappoint us, we are unreasonable, intolerant, unpredictable, moody, PMS-ing or nagging. Sometimes it seems that it’s never enough. It’s really not men’s fault for not knowing what women really want. So here it is, simply. Women want three things from men: someone who cares about them, someone who will listen and respond honestly, and someone they can share a laugh with. In other words, a good friend. Everything else falls under one of these categories.

Interesting. And hypothetically useful information, although it sounds an awful lot like what the patient deltas and whiteknighting gammas believe. For an alternative perspective, here’s what the Dark Lord of Intersexual Relations says women want:

The strongest woman and the most strident feminist wants to be led by, and to submit to, a more powerful man. Polarity is the core of a healthy loving relationship. She does not want the prerogative to walk all over you with her capricious demands and mercurial moods. Her emotions are a hurricane, her soul a saboteur. Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest. When she grasps for a pillar to steady herself against the whipping winds or yearns for an authority figure to foil her worst instincts, it is you who has to be there… strong, solid, unshakable and immovable.

Now, based on everything you know about women, based on everything that has been discussed here about women, which perspective do you think is more reflective of observable reality? And don’t you find it just a little bit suspicious that the three things the self-appointed Man Trainer declares women want happen to be three things that can be just as easily provided by other women?

If you’re undecided, consider why Dr. Helen was linking to the Man Trainer in the first place. It was because of this statement to her husband:

Thank you for going shopping. However, you didn’t get the sausage in the casing because you resent having to go to the grocery store. It’s passive aggressive and uncool. And now, you will have to pay the price.

In just three sentences, the Man Trainer reveals four of the worst common female attributes. Ingratitude, logical incoherence, motive imputation, and assuming the simultaneous roles of plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, and executioner. Needless to say, if one was going to lay odds, they would heavily favor the probability that this woman will be bitter, angry and divorced while Roissy is still feeding on the attractive 20-something she-lawyers that pass through Washington DC.

In summary, the correct way for a man to respond to a Man Trainer is in much the same fashion that Montecore responded to Roy Horn.

WND column

Bigging up failure

The president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, told Forbes that global governance is extremely necessary if we want to prevent another financial crisis. … It is his belief that through global governance, the resiliency of the global financial system can be assured, noting that ultimately it was governments’ use of taxpayer’s money, equivalent to around 25 percent of GDP on both sides of the Atlantic, that prevented another catastrophic great depression from occurring.
– “ECB president favors global governance,” Forbes, April 29, 2010

It should come as no surprise to the informed observer that the central bankers of the world are now beginning to openly push for global governance. The current plight of the euro has amply demonstrated the untenability of monetary union without political union. Without the power to enforce government policy on Greece, the most the Franco-Germanic mandarins of the European Union can do is threaten to withhold bailout money from the International Monetary Fund and the EU member states. This impresses the Greek political and financial elite, but no one else in Greece, and violent protests are already erupting across the country at the mere mention of IMF-imposed financial austerity measures.

For, as one young Greek man correctly asked, why should the youth of Greece be forced to pay for the financial misdeeds of their parents and grandparents?

UKIP in the UK

Peter Hitchens, a longtime Tory, explains why a victory for David Cameron’s Conservative Party would actually mean a terrible defeat for England:

I beg and plead with you not to fall for the shimmering, greasy, cynical fraud which is the Cameron project. You will hate yourself for it in time if you do…. He is truly what he once said he was – the Heir to Blair.

If he wins, he will – as the first Tory leader to win an Election in 18 years – have the power to crush all his critics in the Tory Party.

He will be able to say that political correctness, green zealotry, a pro-EU position and a willingness to spend as much as Labour on the NHS have won the day.

He will claim (falsely) that ‘Right-wing’ policies lost the last three Elections.

Those Tory MPs who agree with you and me will be cowed and silenced for good. The power will lie with the A-list smart set, modish, rich metropolitan liberals hungry for office at all costs who would have been (and who in the case of one of the older ones actually was) in New Labour 13 years ago.

And then where will you have to turn for help as the PC, pro-EU bulldozer trundles across our landscape destroying what is good and familiar and replacing it with a country whose inhabi­tants increasingly cannot recognise it as their own?

The Liberal Democrats? They agree with David. The Labour Party under exciting, new, Blairite Mr Miliband, heir to a Marxist dynasty?

He agrees with David, too. You will look from bench to bench in the House of Commons and see nothing but the people whose ideas have wrecked a great country in half a century, and who still won’t admit they’re wrong.

Britain is going to end up having to turn to UKIP anyhow, unless the EU collapses under the weight of its economic malfeasance before Cameron imports another 15 million Polistanis and forces Britain into the Euro. So, you might as well vote for them now.

Game of games

I know we have a reasonable amount of gamers here, so I’m wondering if anyone might be interested in a multi-genre gaming tournament inspired by the Apprentice Adept series. Obviously, it would all be online, but the Sprint competition between Jamie, Markku and I made me think that it might be fun to have different categories such as Arcade, Console, Wargame, and Classic (Chess, Go, etc). Thanks to RK, VASSAL will make it possible to throw down in everything from ASL to Wooden Ships and Iron Men. You could challenge someone and they’d have one month to get the game started, another month to finish it, and this would allow us to determine precisely whom is the Ultimate Gamer here. Forfeits would not only be permitted, but encouraged, so if you blow the game selection game and wind-up facing Spacebunny at Pooyan, Markku at Sprint, or me at Cod:MW2, there is no point in wasting anyone’s time.

Obviously, this could become an ongoing ladder, but I think it would work best initially as a tournament. We can do something like give away a mouse to the winner, a personally inscribed copy of RGD to the second-place finisher, and TIA for third place. (I was going to suggest SE, but I only have two copies of that.) Anyhow, if you’re interested, speak up, and if you have any ideas for what the categories should be, the selection process, or what games should go in what categories, fire away.

I’m just brainstorming at this point, so everything is on the table.

Edwards, Woods, Obama

If the breaking National Enquirer story about Obama’s purported 2004 affair with Vera Baker, a story now being echoed by the Globe, turns out to be true, it may render the whole state candidate qualification issue irrelevant:

In a story that the National Enquirer has been working on since 2008, the tabloid announced on its website that President Barack Obama spent the night with former aide/fundraiser, Vera Baker in a DC hotel. The Enquirer has been trying to obtain confirmation of the details of the story it started looking into since 2008. Those details have apparently been confirmed.

Coming as it does on the heels of the non-coverage of the John Edwards scandal and the multitudinous affairs of Tiger Woods, it will be very difficult for the mainstream media to keep this one under their hat no matter how desperately they want to protect the Magic Negro. Especially since the international press is already paying attention. Obama’s approval ratings have been on a long death march downward, so in combination with the November Congressional elections, this would likely put his administration into a death spiral. After all, it’s a little difficult to play the sex addiction card and go into rehab for six months when you’re supposed to be in the White House.

Regardless, it is interesting to think about how the Republicans would go about attempting to blow what should be a conclusive electoral advantage. I think nominating Michael Steele, defending Goldman Sachs, launching another pointless invasion, and running hard against Arizona-style immigration restrictions might be effective.

The nonexistent recovery

RGD readers will know that I’m very skeptical of the reliability of government economic statistics, mostly because they are a constantly moving target that mutate over time. However, a closer look at everything from TOTLL to today’s GDP Advance (3.2% annual) makes it appear as if the statistical shenanigans are growing exponentially:

I’m concerned with these numbers – quite concerned in fact. The Federal Government borrowed (and presumably spent) $462 billion in excess of tax receipts over the first three months of 2010. But PCE – personal consumption expenditures – was up $83 billion and federal spending was up only 3.5 billion.

Where did the other $375 billion go?

Into a black hole of covering existing obligations, it appears, and the final private demand GDP deficit covered by this is almost exactly 10% (GDP for the quarter is ~3.650 trillion, so $375 billion is roughly 10% of that.)

Karl Denninger isn’t the only one to notice anomalies with regards to today’s BEA release. Calculated Risk notices that Residential Investment isn’t behaving in its usual post-recessionary manner: “RI as a percent of GDP is at a new record low. And there is no reason to expect a sustained increase in RI until the excess housing inventory is absorbed. Notice that RI usually recovers very quickly coming out of a recession. This time RI is moving sideways – not a good sign for a robust recovery in 2010.”

When rape is comedy gold

The ability of the progressive white woman to stare objective reality in the face and insist it doesn’t exist never ceases to amuse:

Two weeks ago, on a Monday morning, I started to write what I thought was a very clever editorial about violence against women in Haiti. The case, I believed, was being overstated by women’s organizations in need of additional resources. Ever committed to preserving the dignity of Black men in a world which constantly stereotypes them as violent savages, I viewed this writing as yet one more opportunity to fight “the man” on behalf of my brothers. That night, before I could finish the piece, I was held on a rooftop in Haiti and raped repeatedly by one of the very men who I had spent the bulk of my life advocating for.

It hurt. The experience was almost more than I could bear. I begged him to stop. Afraid he would kill me, I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care that I was a Malcolm X scholar. He told me to shut up, and then slapped me in the face….

I went to Haiti after the earthquake to empower Haitians to self-sufficiency. I went to remind them of the many great contributions that Afro-descendants have made to this world, and of their amazing resilience and strength as a people. Not once did I envision myself becoming a receptacle for a Black man’s rage at the white world, but that is what I became. While I take issue with my brother’s behavior, I’m grateful for the experience.

Yes, it’s always a tragedy when a sex tour goes awry…. Compounding the humor here is the way in which the grateful rapee believes it is the fault of “the [white] man” that violent, savage black men rape silly white women who believe in the myth of equality. We can only conclude from this that she believes black men and white women alike are non-sapient animals incapable of making their own decisions or controlling their own behavior. It’s probably just as well that this dimwitted woman happened to choose race relations over the environment as her cretinous crusade. She is clearly that special sort of environmental activist that ends up eaten by bears.

But, even though she avoided a career in ursine digestion, I should nevertheless like to congratulate Ms Kijera on her award-winning entry into the Peace Bride Club, for excellence in female naivete.

Forward to the past

You can always count on the fact that some idiot in authority, somewhere, is going to try to destroy the fabric of civilization:

Lord Justice Laws condemned any attempt to protect believers who take a stand on matters of conscience under the law as “irrational” and “capricious”. In comments likely to set the church on a collision course with the courts, he claimed that doing so could set Britain on the road to a “theocracy”, or religious rule. His comments came as he dismissed a legal challenge by a Christian relationship counsellor who was sacked after refusing to offer sex therapy sessions to homosexual couples because it was against his beliefs.

The views expressed by the amusingly mistitled Lord Justice Laws are largely the same views previously expressed by every totalitarian leader or bureaucrat throughout history. For it is empirically and demonstrably obvious that what is capricious and irrational are the many vagaries of present UK/EU “law”, not belief systems that have been much more clearly codified and accepted by far more people for centuries.

Every intelligent individual, religious or irreligious, should be able to see the very clear danger involved in declaring the right of the state to override conscience and that “no religious belief itself could be protected under the law ‘however long its tradition, however rich its culture'”. This is overt totalitarian madness and is a direct conceptual strike at every cherished freedom of Western civilization. If there is no room for the law to respect religious beliefs, there is no room for it to respect beliefs of any kind and it rests upon a foundation of nothing more than the law of tooth and claw. It is not only absurd, but downright backwards to claim that respecting religious beliefs would put the UK “on the road to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.” Most historical theocracies have been less autocratic than the current EU, and far less autocratic than dozens of the bloodthirsty anti-religious regimes of the 20th century.

Secularists should beware of celebrating this form of superficially secular form of jurisprudence, as it isn not indicative of a movement towards a rational and progressive secular humanist society, but rather the unlimited state power formerly seen in ancient pagan societies.